According to Jews, Christians and Muslims
are hypocrites and liars….why does a Jew believe Musa(pbuh) is a prophet?

The same reason why Christians and Muslims believe that Moses
was a Prophet, no need to reinvent the wheel.

Originally posted by Ghazzali

And it is relevant to the topic because
then the same logic could possibly be used to prove that Isa(pbuh) and
Muhammad(pbuh) were also prophets.

That is why the burden of proof falls on Muslims to prove that
Muhammad was a prophet; a fact which both Jews and Christians disagree with. Moses,
Jesus, (the greater Moses) his 12 Apostles and other prophets spoke about each
other. They all knew that Moses and Jesus were prophets, even Muhammad. None of
them however spoke about Muhammad let alone him being a prophet, not even
Ishmael or his 12 sons. In the Quran ONLY Muhammad talks about his “so-called” revelation
from God, no one else can even confirm it or even eye-witness it. It’s like
saying Ishmael was the son that was about to be sacrificed by Abraham but the
Quran never mentions Ishmael by name, which the Quran doesn’t. But, it does
mention Isaac.

But, yet Muslims say his revelation is the last one. Why,
because he says so with no divine backing to prove it, really?

I see that Kish is still up to his old tricks, eh? Nevertheless, this is a good topic, but I think that Kish is a little confused on the matter.

Originally posted by Kish

Deuteronomy 19:15 . . . At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand goodMatthew 18:16 . . . in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.2
Corithians 13:1 . . .This is the third time I am coming to YOU. “At the
mouth of two witnesses or of three every matter must be established.

Why
did Moses, Jesus, his 12 disciples and the Apostle Paul keep this
principle of LAW but not Muhammad? They ALL agreed with each other, why
not Muhammad? Could it be Muhammad came with his own teachings and that is why not one person can confirm his revelation or his miracles?

Herein lies the problem, Kish! You have completely misquoted your own Bible! Let's look at Deuteronomy 19:15 to see the context. We will discuss what the Bible says about judging a claimant to prophethood later.

Deuteronomy 19:15 states:

"One witness is not enough to convict
anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter
must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses." (NIV)

As can be clearly seen, this verse is concerned with criminal law, not claimants to prophethood. Commenting on the phrase "any crime or offense", the medieval Jewish scholar Rashi stated:

"...where
his testimony would lead to the accused being punished, either with
corporal punishment or with or monetary punishment. However, one
[witness] may rise up to [compel his fellow to take] an oath, as
follows: If one says to his fellow, “Give me the maneh [100 zuzim] that I
lent you,” and his fellow replies, “I have nothing of yours,” and one
witness testifies for him [the plaintiff] that he [the defendant] owes
him [the money], [the defendant] is required to swear [that he did not
borrow any money].""[1]

So, not only did the Torah require at least two witnesses for criminal cases, one witness was also acceptable as long as he took an oath. I will show later that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) also followed this method in some cases.

So, what does the Bible say about people who claim to be prophets? That issue is dealt with in Deuteronomy 18:20-22. It states:

"But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”

21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?”22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed." (NIV)

Notice that it says nothing about eye-witnesses. Rather, the way to judge whether a prophet was a true prophet or a false one was to see if the prophet:

A. Called on the people to worship other gods, and

B. Made prophecies which did not come true.

In fact, the passage clearly states that if people ask how they could know "when a message has not been spoken by the LORD", the answer is that they should wait and see if the prophecies made by the prophet come true. If not, then he is a false prophet and must be put to death.

Therefore, to judge whether any claimant to prophethood was telling the truth or not, we must analyze their prophecies. I will do that with regard to Paul and Muhammad (pbuh) in a separate post, inshaAllah.

To summarize, eyewitnesses were required in matters of criminal law and prophets were judged according to their teachings (worshiping God or worshiping "other gods") and whether their prophecies came true.

Now, Kish claims that Muhammad (pbuh) did not follow the Law of Moses (pbuh). Well, first of all, the Law of Moses was for the Jews only. The Laws that Muhammad (pbuh) brought supercede all previous Laws, because Islam is a universal religion and Muhammad (pbuh) was sent to all people, whereas Moses (pbuh) was sent only to the Jews. However, the evidence shows that Islam shares the same priniciple with regard to criminal law and eye witnesses. For example, in the matter of financial disagreements, the Quran states that two male witnesses or one male and two female witnesses should be brought forth:

"O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions
involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to
writing Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let
not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah Has taught him, so let him
write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His
Lord Allah, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable
is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, Let his
guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her." (2:182)

Sahih Bukhari also mentions the need for witnesses in such matters:

"Narrated Abu Wail: Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) said, "Whoever takes a (false)
oath in order to grab some property (unjustly), Allah will be angry with
him when he will meet Him. Allah confirmed that through His Divine
Revelation: "Verily! Those who purchase a little gain at the cost of
Allah's covenant and their oaths . . . they will have a painful
punishment." (3.77) Al-Ash'ath bin Qais came to us and asked, 'What is
Abu Abdur-Rahman (i.e. 'Abdullah) telling you? 'We told him what he was
narrating to us. He said, 'He was telling the truth; this Divine Verse
was revealed in connection with me. There was a dispute between me and
another man about something and the case was filed before Allah's
Apostle who said, 'Produce your two witnesses
or else the defendant is to take an oath.' I said, The defendant will
surely take a (false) oath caring for nothing.' The Prophet said,
'Whoever takes a false oath in order to grab (other's) property, then
Allah will be angry with him when he will meet Him.' Then Allah revealed
its confirmation. Al-Ashath then recited the above Divine Verse."" (48:386)

The Quran also affirmed the need to produce four, reliable witnesses in order to prove an accusation of sexual iniquity:

"If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses
from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to
houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other)
way." (4:15)

So, we can see that both the Torah and the Quran are in agreement with regard to the need for witnesses in criminal cases or financial disagreements.

Edited by islamispeace - 24 November 2012 at 3:57pm

Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

Now that the issue regarding Deuteronomy 19 has hopefully been cleared up, we can investigate which person, Muhammad (pbuh) or Paul, met the Torah's test of a prophet or any person claiming to be the recipient of God's message. To reiterate, the test the Bible provides for prophets is given in Deuteronomy 18:20-22-

"But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”

21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?”22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed."

Let us deal with Paul first. Before we delve into whether he passed the test of Deuteronomy 18, it is prudent to read the story of his life-changing experience on the road to Damascus. In fact, there are multiple accounts of this encounter in the New Testament:

"As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him.4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied.6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus.9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything." (Acts 9:3-9)

"“About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me.7 I fell to the ground and heard a voice say to me, ‘Saul! Saul! Why do you persecute me?’

8 “‘Who are you, Lord?’ I asked.

“ ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,’ he replied.9 My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me.

10 “‘What shall I do, Lord?’ I asked.

“ ‘Get up,’ the Lord said, ‘and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.’11 My companions led me by the hand into Damascus, because the brilliance of the light had blinded me." (Acts 22:6-11)

"“On one of these journeys I was going to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests.13 About
noon, King Agrippa, as I was on the road, I saw a light from heaven,
brighter than the sun, blazing around me and my companions.14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,a]">[a] ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’" (Acts 26:12-14)

The differences in these verses are self-evident. One would think that the "inspired" authors of the New Testament would not have written contradictory accounts of the same story.

Moving on, does Paul pass the test of Deuteronomy 18? Did he speak in the name of the One God or in the name of "other gods"? Did he proclaim anything that did not come to pass? The answer can be found in the following verses:

"To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:

3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 1:2-3)

"For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.12 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age,13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good." (Titus 2:11-14)

Clearly, Paul spoke in the name of Jesus and worshiped him as "God",
which is of course nothing new. It is the central tenet of Christianity
that Jesus was God incarnate. But by speaking in the name of Jesus,
Paul fails the test of Deuteronomy 18.

Finally, Paul also spoke about future events, as in the following:

"According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.18 Therefore encourage one another with these words." (1 Thessalonians 4:15-18)

Clearly, Paul was stating that Jesus' return was imminent and that it would occur within the lifetime of some of the first generation of Christians. This prophecy was also made in the First Epistle of John:

"Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour." (1 John 2:18)

Therefore, Paul failed the second part of the test of Deuteronomy 18. Hence, according to the Bible, Paul was a false prophet.

In my next post, I will discuss whether Muhammad (pbuh) passed or failed the test of Deuteronomy 18, inshaAllah.

Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

Regarding the first test, the question is did Muhammad (pbuh) speak in the name of God or "other gods"? It is well-known that Muhammad (pbuh) preached in the name of the One God, not multiple gods. He rejected idolatry and polytheism and preached a strict monotheism. Moreover, he preached that the God (Allah) who sent him also sent the previous prophets. The Quran states this clearly:

"Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from
among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn
back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to
Allah's Will)." (2:64)

"Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to
Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses
and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no
difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in
Islam)."" (2:136)

"Say:
Will ye dispute with us about Allah, seeing that He is our Lord and
your Lord; that we are responsible for our doings and ye for yours; and
that We are sincere (in our faith) in Him?" (2:139)

From these verses, it is clear that Muhammad (pbuh) certainly did not "speak in the name of other gods". Rather, he spoke in the name of the One God, the God of Abraham (pbuh). Therefore, he passed the first test of Deuteronomy 18, unlike Paul.

Now onto the second part. Did Muhammad (pbuh) make any false prophecies, like Paul? The number of prophecies is too long to list, but all have either come true or are yet to be fulfilled. The following article mentions some of the prophecies made by Muhammad (pbuh) which came true within his lifetime or the lifetime of his companions:

Until then, it is clear that Muhammad (pbuh) passed the second test of Deuteronomy 18. Therefore, in the absence of opposing evidence, he was a true prophet and, in the words of Kish, "had a revelation". And Allah knows best.

Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

It was an established law, a common fact so it would not have to spell it out again. If such the case was a common law which we both agree and here in this instance it is being applied to criminal law it would even more so apply to prophet hood which is more of a serious nature then even criminal law.

Originally posted by islamispeace

To summarize, eyewitnesses were required in matters of criminal law and prophets were judged according to their teachings (worshiping God or worshiping "other gods") and whether their prophecies came true.

Incorrect, eye-witnesses was a principle in the Law of establishing every matter at the mouth of two or three witnesses, be it criminal law, settling a matter, prophet hood or anything else that is deemed as fact and believable.

Are you suggesting that it applies to one and not the other? Dismiss it when referring to prophet hood but apply it only to criminal law?

Originally posted by islamispeace

Now, Kish claims that Muhammad (pbuh) did not follow the Law of Moses (pbuh)

Muhammad did not follow the Law of Moses in establishing or confirming a matter as truth, which is the touchstone of any true religion.

But you conveniently left Q 2:282 out "If the party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully. And get two witnesses out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women."The Sura of the Table (Al-Ma'ida) 5:109 from 10 A.H. reads,
"O ye who believe! When death approaches any of you, (take) witnesses among yourselves when making bequests---two just men." Are these criminal offenses?

The Sura of the Light (Al-Nur) 24:4 from 5-6 A.H. requires four witnesses in order to sustain an accusation of marital infidelity. It reads,
"And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors."

So I ask you, if two or four witnesses are necessary in human matters, how much more important it is to have two or more witnesses establishing a word as "the Word of God" come by revelation? No wonder God has used not just ONE man to deliver his message, nor just 2 or 3 witnesses, but 40 prophets.

From this we understand that when Muhammad spoke to the people of Mecca saying that he was a prophet, and the Meccans and the Jews demanded that Muhammad should show them some confirming miracle, it was not just because of hard-hearted unbelief. That may have been true of many of them, but as the Quran itself admits, some of the Jews were honorable and feared God. The Jews and others in Mecca were saying, "One witness is not enough. We need a confirming witness from God." They were doing exactly what God has commanded men to do, because Jehovah (YHWH), the Eternal One, has ruled for our sake that there must be two or more witnesses.

Originally posted by islamispeace

So, we can see that both the Torah and the Quran are in agreement with regard to the need for witnesses in criminal cases or financial disagreements.

However, the key factor here is Muhammad failed to have two or more witnesses to confirm his revelation as fact, unlike Moses, Jesus and Paul. In fact in all three men, had manifestations that God’s Holy Spirit was present in front of all to see. That in itself proved that God was backing them.

Now that the issue
regarding Deuteronomy 19 has hopefully been cleared up, we can investigate
which person, Muhammad (pbuh) or Paul, met the Torah's test of a prophet or any
person claiming to be the recipient of God's message.

Well, how can one
even come close to being a messenger of God if he cannot follow a simple Law?
Unless of course he thinks he is above the Law and can break them at will, I
don’t think you want to go there with me on that one!

But let me remind
you, the post is not on prophet hood but whether or not the revelations of
these men were true. That will determine whether or not they were sent by God.

Originally posted by islamispeace

The differences in
these verses are self-evident. One would think that the
"inspired" authors of the New Testament would not have written
contradictory accounts of the same story

Seriously, this is
all you have when no enemy of Christianity (Roman or Jew), scholars or
historian said otherwise until the 19th Century, not even ancient
Islam?

The only thing
evident here is that you are entitled to an opinion and that no two people who see
and explain the same thing the same.

Originally posted by islamispeace

Clearly, Paul spoke
in the name of Jesus and worshiped him as "God", which is of course
nothing new

Another weak attempt by
Islamispeace to assume what Paul is saying here. Throughout the Holy Scriptures
including the fourteen books the Apostle Paul wrote in the New Testament, they all
clearly differentiate God and Christ.

Henry Alford, in TheGreekTestament, states: “I would submit that [a rendering that
clearly differentiates God and Christ, at Titus 2:13] satisfies all the
grammatical requirements of the sentence: that it is both structurally and
contextually more probable, and more agreeable to the Apostle’s way of
writing.”—(Boston, 1877), Vol. III, p. 421.

“of
the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus” TheRiversideNew Testament, Boston and New York.

“of
the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus” ANewTranslationofthe Bible, by James Moffatt, New York and London.

“of
the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ” LaSainteBible,
by Louis Segond, Paris

“of
the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus” TheNewAmericanBible, New York and London.

In
this place we find two nouns connected by καί (kai, “and”), the first
noun being preceded by the definite article του̃ (tou, “of the”) and the
second noun without the definite article. This indicates that when two distinct
persons are connected by καί, if the first person is preceded by the definite
article it is not necessary to repeat the definite article before the second person.

A
detailed study of the construction in Tit 2:13 is found in TheAuthorshipoftheFourthGospelandOtherCriticalEssays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 439-457

Again,
Paul was talking about two distinct persons as shown throughout the rest of his
writings. Nice try anyway.

Originally posted by islamispeace

1 Thessalonians
4:15-18

This
means that the first resurrection begun early in Christ’s presence, and it
continues “during his presence.” So, he did return, first in the flesh, then
spirit. How else was he able to talk to the Apostle Paul while on the road to
Damascus? (1 Corinthians 15:23) What you also failed to grasp is that rather
than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of
time.

Everything
Paul said came true. That is why no one contested what Paul and that small ban of Christians wrote, it was part
of the then known history and nothing has changed. Of course NOW in this day and age modern-day skeptics wants to say otherwise.

Not so fast! And skip the 2 or more
eye-witness law that he failed to keep to confirm that his revelation was
indeed a true testimony from God, not a chance. That alone disqualifies him
just from not being a good example and being a law abiding citizen let alone a
true servant and messenger of God. How can Muhammad be a messenger of God when
he cannot even follow God’s law concerning eye-witnesses to establish a matter
as being true opposed to being false?

As I have shown you, not only by using the Holy Scriptures
but also the Quran, it does not apply to just criminal cases but in any matter
where truth needs to be established concerning God’s law. Again, if this was to
apply in settling human matters so more importantly would it apply when it
comes to matters representing the most high God which is why that law/principle
is applied throughout the entire 66 books of the Holy Scriptures and it’s 40
Prophets.

Muhammad and others comes along decades later and wants to
change the whole dynamics of things, not hardly. Even Moses and Jesus
testimonies required two or more witnesses (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) to
establish a matter as being true.

This my friend was a rule of thumb throughout the whole
Scriptures (OT and NT) to root out false prophets and false prophecies, the
very criteria that many men failed during and after Jesus ascension to heaven.

Originally posted by islamispeace

It is well-known that
Muhammad (pbuh) preached in the name of the One God, not multiple gods.

Oh really, when, who and where was the name
of Allah first applied, certainly not by Israel, although the God of Israel
Jehovah/Yahweh (YHWH) is still being used today, the Dead Sea Scroll confirms
that. In fact who was the chief god of the Kaaba and who worshiped him? That’s
another question I’m looking for an answer too. You and I know that Allah is
really not a name but a descriptor that literally means “the god” like saying
“elohim” or “theos” these are not names but titles.

So did
Muhammad speak in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? A resounding
no.

Here is
what the scholars say about the title name Allah:

It is not
related that the Black Stone was connected with any special god. In the Ka'ba
was the statue of the god Hubal who might be called the god of Mecca and of the
Ka'ba. Caetani gives great prominence to the connection between the Ka'ba and
Hubal. Besides him, however, al-Lat, al-`Uzza, and al-Manat were worshipped and
are mentioned in the Kur'an; Hubal is never mentioned there. What position
Allah held beside these is not exactly known. The Islamic tradition has
certainly elevated him at the expense of other deities. It may be considered
certain that the Black Stone was not the only idol in or at the Ka'ba. The
Makam Ibrahim was of course a sacred stone from very early times. Its name has
not been handed down. Beside it several idols are mentioned, among them the 360
statues. (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill,
1987, Islam, p. 587-591)

"The
verses of the Qur'an make it clear that the very name Allah existed in the
Jahiliyya or pre-Islamic Arabia. Certain pagan tribes believed in a god whom
they called 'Allah' and whom they believed to be the
creator of heaven and earth and holder of the highest rank in the hierarchy of
the gods. It is well known that the Quraish
as well as other tribes believed in Allah, whom they designated as the 'Lord of
the House' (i.e., of the Ka'ba)...It is therefore clear that the Qur'anic
conception of Allah is not entirely new." A
Guide to the Contents of the Quran, Faruq Sherif, (Reading, 1995),
pgs. 21-22., Muslim)

According
to al-Masudi (Murudj, iv. 47), certain people have regarded the Ka'ba as a
temple devoted to the sun, the moon and the five planets. The 36o idols placed
round the Ka'ba also point in this direction. It can therefore hardly be denied
that traces exist of an astral symbolism. At the same time one can safely say
that there can be no question of any general conception on these lines. The
cult at the Ka'ba was in the heathen period syncretic as is usual in
heathenism. (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J.
Brill, 1987, Islam, p. 587-591)

"Jehovah" is the
only revealed proper name for the "Elohim" of the Old Testament Here
is my scriptural proof (Exodus 3:13; 6:3) Historical and archeological proof is
available everywhere from non-Christians sources or at any Museum. Can you say
the same with allah? If so, feel free to show the forum its use before
Muhammad.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.